Basic Training

Discussion in 'The Training Wing' started by Bananamanscot, May 27, 2011.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Can anyonegive me their thoughts please

    my son has just finished his basic training at ATC Pirbright and is now on his phase 2

    an army WO2 friend of mine says that the basic he has just completed cause he is not in an infintry regiment but is doing a trade does not make him a soldier and is a joke also that because he will never be seen as front line troops he should get less money.

    this all came from the para money debate on the radio yesterday my own feeling is thats if you do the training to be a specialiest you should get extra money if you are sent on operations never miind what post you hold

    My son is a soldier as far as he and the army who pay his wages are concerned and he felt his basic made him a soldier
     


  2. I think what the infantry wo2 was trying to say is that if your bey was sent to Afghanistan, he's not going to go through the same day in day out hardships and be a premier choice for a combat situation unlike an infanteer who is trained for his main one and only job of engaging and killing the enemy,when you watch war films, read war books or hear the most harrowing tales of combat from ex servicemen/servicemen about contacts from falklands to helmand,75% of the time there britains infantry.not a group of ammo techs. just to say that I am not in the army yet, and this common information I have mentioned comes from friends that serve,watchin the majority of documenturies about the war available on British tv over the past years and use of my basic common sense
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Obviously this WO2 hasnt met the many lads who were trawled to fill gaps in Infantry and PARA reg sections over the last four or five years. Ive personnaly had six of my REME fitter section who had volunteered to go with 2 and 3 PARA and SCOTS as part of there section to be Infantry soldiers all welcomed with open arms and did a bloody good job. This goes for lots of other Corp and Regiments who have also given trawled soldiers to Herrick. Plus the fact that bullets dont decipher if your an infantry soldier or trade....as unfortunately a lot of good soldiers including five very good friends of mine have found out in the last 7 years and only 2 of them were Line infantry.

    Be proud of what your son has achieved so far and is doing at the moment, if he does want to be more front line then he will get opportunities to do this ...and by the way my son went to Afghan as Infantry and that is not his trade so do know what Im talking about.
     
  4. I would say your friend is a dick.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. He's probably got a chip on his shoulder that the "tradesmen" get more money than he does. All Army tradesmen are soldiers first and tradesmen second (that gets indoctrinated into you from Day dot). Saying that, although a REME fitter or a Signals Tech (or an RLC Ammo Tech to reference post 2) won't be forming up into sections and doing rapid advances to the enemy, they can be embedded into an infantry section on occasions. He also does not realise (or know) the sticky situations some of these tradesmen put themselves into to carry out their work. It is very common for an infantry soldier to be unaware of the tasks carried out by the support troops but everyone knows what the infanteer does.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Agreed! You certainly dont have to be infantry to be frontline facing exactly the same thing. Has he not heard of attached arms who go out on the majority of patrols with the infantry? What a tube!
     
  7. Op Telic 7, I had the pleasure and honour of working with a REME Armourer Cpl. During the day he was not just embedded in an Infantry section but commanding it although to be honest they werent proper Infantry but Cavalry acting in their secondary role.
    After the patrols while the rest of his team were enjoying their down-time, he was back in the machy-wagon fixing any weapon faults that had been reported whilst he was "otherwise" engaged.

    I freely admit I was **** at infantry skills but there are a lot of "tradesmen" who can and have done it.
    My attitude always was that I should never have to fire my 5.56mm rifle in anger because if I was doing my job right, there would be 12 fit tanks with working 120mm cannons, 7.62mm chain-gun and GPMG between me and the enemy stopping them getting in range.

    I never got the knack of firing the SA80, always getting a paperwork-pass after three attempts at the APWT, on the second and third shoots the results were normally worse than the inital attempt.
    Always got markmansship scores on the SLR though before the SA80 came in.
     
  8. Although going about it like a bit of a cock, I think what this chap is trying to say is that having passed phase one, but not trade training, means he should be capable of marching in a straight line and passing an APWT. This doesn't make him a trained soldier, he is however still a soldier, whatever capbadge.
     
  9. Your son will find out for himself soon enough that your friend was pulling your leg, and that he is considered a soldier.

    Many such soldiers have carried out an infantry role, for example the Royal Artillary in Northern Ireland. However, the "Infants" [they dislike being called that] won't be treated as tradesmen.
     
  10. I totally agree with you. Is your mate really a WO2 in the Paras?
     
  11. No mate he is a retired infantry wo1 who is back at hq as a wo2 and was defn not yanking my chain as his dolly was thrown out the pram and he accused me of being a left wing aggitator when his argument as I saw it ran out his feelings are if you are not infantry you are not a soldier and should not get paid as much as civvies could do the job my son is a combat chef this ex friends attitude was if the fob or base was over run or attacked chefs and other capbadges would be of no use so shouldn't get the same money like wise the guys who have their jump wings should not get para pay as they are not paras considering the paras haven't jumped in anger since suez should they then I think if you've done the training for tactical use by the army in case of need them they should pay for it otherwise I would tell them to **** off if they downgraded my pay
     
  12. Don't worry, mate, eventually he'll hand in the Uniform and will find out sharpish the difference between having a trade and not.

    I am not having a go at any of our Teeth Arms - I COULDN'T have done their job and what a Sterling job that is, however, you have got to think of the future, you don't see many Warriors or MBT's parked in Tesco, do you?

    I wonder if the WO2 is my Dad, 'coz I'm a grumpy old twat as well!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Arters you dont do 24yrs in the prison service without being grumpy bolshy and an arguementative twat like I am

    wore the uniform did the courses had the ball park changed too many time to roll over and take it, last large riot we had very few staff responded to the call when they've removed most of our allowances over the years for specialist skills which they deemed neccessary and removed our specialist pay fecking sure im not playing if they dont require it anymore then dont pay new specialists to jump ot planes pay the old ones who applied when it was on the pay scale but also dont expect new staff to come running to help when it all goes tits up

    learn from the rest of us who have been shafted by succesive govts over the years maybe the £600,000 they spent painting and decorating number 10 could have been better spent, pay the guys the money that was agreed at the time they volunteered to fill the need
     
  14. Your WO2 mate sounds like a ******* prick...
     
  15. It sounds like your "mate" is an over-promoted knob. I would have expected more maturity and a better understanding of the Army in the round, from a Warrant Officer. The Army is a big team, each part relies on the others to function.

    The infantry aren't going to get far without someone to feed them, provide them ammunition and repair their equipment. To believe otherwise is naive.

    As previously stated, everyone in the army is a soldier first and so when required, "everybody fights". The principle difference between the combat arms and the rest is that the combat arms (and some of the combat support arms) deliberately seek contact with the enemy as their primary job; other arms engage in contact with the enemy in order to defend themselves (and others) and in order to allow them to conduct their jobs supporting "the battle".

    As to the trade pay issue, the mostly hinges around retention. If the army has invested to train up a specialist, it needs to adequately pay him or her in order to keep him from leaving and earning more in civvy street using those skills which the army has provided. Trade pay is basically all about protecting the army's investment.
     
    • Like Like x 2